18170 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

imposes other onerous legal notice 

provisions in the case of a dispute. 

(4) The creditor demands 

unreasonable notice from the covered 

borrower as a condition for legal action. 

(5) The creditor uses a check or other 

method of access to a deposit, savings, 

or other financial account maintained 

by the covered borrower, or uses the 

title of a vehicle as security for the 

obligation, except that, in connection 

with a consumer credit transaction with 

an MAPR consistent with § 232.4(b): 

(i) The creditor may require an 

electronic fund transfer to repay a 

consumer credit transaction, unless 

otherwise prohibited by Regulation E 

(Electronic Fund Transfers) 12 CFR Part 

205; 

(ii) The creditor may require direct 

deposit of the consumer’s salary as a 

condition of eligibility for consumer 

credit, unless otherwise prohibited by 

law; or 

(iii) The creditor may, if not otherwise 

prohibited by applicable law, take a 

security interest in funds deposited after 

the extension of credit in an account 

established in connection with the 

consumer credit transaction. 

(6) The creditor requires as a 

condition for the extension of consumer 

credit that the covered borrower 

establish an allotment to repay the 

obligation. 

(7) The covered borrower is 

prohibited from prepaying the consumer 

credit or is charged a penalty fee for 

prepaying all or part of the consumer 

credit. 

(b) For purposes of this section, an 

assignee may not engage in any 

transaction or take any action that 

would be prohibited for the creditor. 

§ 232.9 Penalties and remedies. 

(a) Misdemeanor. A creditor or 

assignee who knowingly violates 10 

U.S.C. 987 as implemented by this part 

shall be fined as provided in title 18, 

United States Code, or imprisoned for 

not more than one year, or both. 

(b) Preservation of other remedies. 

The remedies and rights provided under 

10 U.S.C. 987 as implemented by this 

part are in addition to and do not 

preclude any remedy otherwise 

available under law to the person 

claiming relief under the statute, 

including any award for consequential 

damages and punitive damages. 

(c) Contract void. Any credit 

agreement, promissory note, or other 

contract with a covered borrower which 

fails to comply with 10 U.S.C. 987 as 

implemented by this regulation or 

which contains one or more provisions 

prohibited under 10 U.S.C. 987 as 

implemented by this regulation is void 

from the inception of the contract. 

(d) Arbitration. Notwithstanding 9 

U.S.C. 2, or any other Federal or State 

law, rule, or regulation, no agreement to 

arbitrate any dispute involving the 

extension of consumer credit involving 

a covered borrower pursuant to this part 

shall be enforceable against any covered 

borrower, or any person who was a 

covered borrower when the agreement 

was made. 

§ 232.10 Servicemembers Civil Relief Act 

protections unaffected. 

Nothing in this part may be construed 

to limit or otherwise affect the 

applicability of Section 207 and any 

other provisions of the Servicemembers 

Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. App. 527). 

§ 232.11 Effective date and transition. 

Applicable consumer credit—This 

part shall only apply to consumer credit 

that is extended to a covered borrower 

and consummated on or after October 1, 

2007. 

Dated: April 5, 2007. 

L.M. Bynum, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, DOD. 

[FR Doc. 07–1780 Filed 4–6–07; 12:20 pm] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[CGD05–07–017] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulations for Marine 

Events; Rappahannock River, Essex 

County, Westmoreland County, 

Layton, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes a 

temporary special local regulation for 

‘‘2007 Rappahannock River Boaters 

Association Spring Radar Shootout’’, 

power boat races to be held on the 

waters of the Rappahannock River near 

Layton, VA. These special local 

regulations are necessary to provide for 

the safety of life on navigable waters 

during the event. This action is 

intended to restrict vessel traffic in the 

Rappahannock River during the event. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

May 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander 

(dpi), Fifth Coast Guard District, 431 

Crawford Street, Portsmouth, Virginia 

23704–5004, hand-deliver them to 

Room 415 at the same address between 

9 a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays, or fax 

them to (757) 391–8149. The Coast 

Guard Inspections and Investigations 

Branch, Fifth Coast Guard District, 

maintains the public docket for this 

rulemaking. Comments and material 

received from the public, as well as 

documents indicated in this preamble as 

being available in the docket, will 

become part of this docket and will be 

available for inspection or copying at 

the above address between 9 a.m. and 2 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Dennis Sens, Marine Events 

Coordinator, Fifth Coast Guard District, 

at (757) 398–6204. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related material. If you 

do so, please include your name and 

address, identify the docket number for 

this rulemaking (CGD05–07–017), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and give the reason for each 

comment. Please submit all comments 

and related material in an unbound 

format, no larger than 81⁄2 by 11 inches, 

suitable for copying. If you would like 

to know they reached us, please enclose 

a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 

envelope. We will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. We may change 

this proposed rule in view of them. 

Public Meeting 

We do not plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for a meeting by writing to the Coast 

Guard at the address under ADDRESSES

explaining why one would be 

beneficial. If we determine that one 

would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 

one at a time and place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

On June 30, 2007, the Rappahannock 

River Boaters Association (RRBA) will 

sponsor the ‘‘2006 RRBA Spring Radar 

Shootout’’, on the waters of the 

Rappahannock River near Layton, 

Virginia. The event will consist of 

approximately 35 powerboats 

participating in high-speed competitive 

races, traveling along a 3-mile strait line 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 18171 

race course. Participating boats will race 

individually within the designated 

course. A fleet of spectator vessels is 

anticipated to gather nearby to view the 

competition. Due to the need for vessel 

control during the event, vessel traffic 

will be temporarily restricted to provide 

for the safety of participants, spectators 

and transiting vessels. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes to establish 

temporary special local regulations on 

specified waters of the Rappahannock 

River. The temporary special local 

regulations will be enforced from 11:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 30 2007, and 

will restrict general navigation in the 

regulated area during the event. Except 

for participants and vessels authorized 

by the Coast Guard Patrol Commander, 

no person or vessel will be allowed to 

enter or remain in the regulated area. 

These regulations are needed to control 

vessel traffic during the event to 

enhance the safety of participants, 

spectators and transiting vessels. 

Regulatory Evaluation 

This proposed rule is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, 

Regulatory Planning and Review, and 

does not require an assessment of 

potential costs and benefits under 

section 6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office 

of Management and Budget has not 

reviewed it under that Order. It is not 

‘‘significant’’ under the regulatory 

policies and procedures of the 

Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS). 

We expect the economic impact of 

this proposed rule to be so minimal that 

a full Regulatory Evaluation under the 

regulatory policies and procedures of 

DHS is unnecessary. 

Although this regulation will prevent 

traffic from transiting a portion of the 

Rappahannock River during the event, 

the effect of this regulation will not be 

significant due to the limited duration 

that the regulated area will be in effect 

and the extensive advance notifications 

that will be made to the maritime 

community via the Local Notice to 

Mariners, marine information 

broadcasts, and area newspapers, so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly. Additionally, the regulated 

area has been narrowly tailored to 

impose the least impact on general 

navigation yet provide the level of safety 

deemed necessary. Vessel traffic will be 

able to transit the regulated area 

between heats, when the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander deems it is safe to do 

so. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. This rule will affect the 

following entities, some of which may 

be small entities: The owners or 

operators of vessels intending to transit 

this section of the Rappahannock River 

during the event. 

This rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities for the 

following reasons. This rule will be in 

effect for only a short period, from 11:30 

a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on June 30, 2007. 

Although the regulated area will apply 

to a 3 mile segment of the 

Rappahannock River immediately east 

of Layton, Virginia, traffic may be 

allowed to pass through the regulated 

area with the permission of the Coast 

Guard patrol commander. In the case 

where the patrol commander authorizes 

passage through the regulated area 

during the event, vessels shall proceed 

at the minimum speed necessary to 

maintain a safe course that minimizes 

wake near the race course. Before the 

enforcement period, we will issue 

maritime advisories so mariners can 

adjust their plans accordingly. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment (see 

ADDRESSES) explaining why you think it 

qualifies and how and to what degree 

this rule would economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the rule would affect your small 

business, organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction and you have questions 

concerning its provisions or options for 

compliance, please contact the address 

listed under ADDRESSES. The Coast 

Guard will not retaliate against small 

entities that question or complain about 

this rule or any policy or action of the 

Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 or more in any one year. 

Though this proposed rule would not 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
18172 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 11, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Commandant Instruction 

M16475.1D, which guides the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that there are no factors in this case that 

would limit the use of a categorical 

exclusion under section 2.B.2 of the 

Instruction. Therefore, we believe that 

this rule should be categorically 

excluded, under figure 2–1, paragraph 

(34)(h), of the Instruction, from further 

environmental documentation. 

Under figure 2–1, paragraph (34)(h), 

of the Instruction, an ‘‘Environmental 

Analysis Check List’’ and a ‘‘Categorical 

Exclusion Determination’’ are not 

required for this rule. Comments on this 

section will be considered before we 

make the final decision on whether to 

categorically exclude this rule from 

further environmental review. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 100 

Marine safety, Navigation (water), 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 100 as follows: 

PART 100—SAFETY OF LIFE ON 

NAVIGABLE WATERS 

1. The authority citation for part 100 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1233, Department of 

Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add a temporary § 100.35–T05–017 

to read as follows: 

§ 100.35–T05–017 Rappahannock River, 

Essex County, Westmoreland County, 

Layton, Virginia. 

(a) Regulated area. The regulated area 

is established for the waters of the 

Rappahannock River, adjacent to 

Layton, VA, from shoreline to shoreline, 

bounded on the west by a line running 

along longitude 076°58′30′′ W., and 

bounded on the east by a line running 

along longitude 076°56′00′′ W. All 

coordinates reference Datum NAD 1983. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this section 

(1) Coast Guard Patrol Commander 

means a commissioned, warrant, or 

petty officer of the Coast Guard who has 

been designated by the Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads. 

(2) Official Patrol means any vessel 

assigned or approved by Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Hampton Roads 

with a commissioned, warrant, or petty 

officer on board and displaying a Coast 

Guard ensign. 

(c) Regulations. (1) Except for persons 

or vessels authorized by the Coast Guard 

Patrol Commander, no person or vessel 

may enter or remain in the regulated 

area. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

regulated area shall: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately when 

directed to do so by any Official Patrol 

and then proceed only as directed. 

(ii) All persons and vessels shall 

comply with the instructions of the 

Official Patrol. 

(iii) When authorized to transit the 

regulated area, all vessels shall proceed 

at the minimum speed necessary to 

maintain a safe course that minimizes 

wake near the race course. 

(d) Enforcement period. This section 

will be enforced from 11:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m. on June 30, 2007. 

Dated: March 26, 2007. 

Larry L. Hereth, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, 

Fifth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E7–6778 Filed 4–10–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[CGD05–07–033] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone: Big Timber Creek, 

Westville, NJ 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes to 

establish a temporary Safety Zone 

during the ‘‘Westville Parade of Lights’’, 

an event to be held June 30, 2007. This 

Safety Zone is necessary to provide for 

the safety of life on navigable waters 

during the event. This action is 

intended to temporarily restrict vessel 

traffic in the regulated area within Big 

Timber Creek. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must reach the Coast Guard on or before 

May 11, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: You may mail comments 

and related material to Commander, 

Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay, One 

Washington Avenue, Philadelphia, 

Pennsylvania 19147–4335, hand-deliver 

them to the same address between 9 

a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays, or fax 

them to (215) 271–4903. The Sector 

Delaware Bay, Waterways Management 

Branch, maintains the public docket for 

this rulemaking. Comments and 

material received from the public, as 

well as documents indicated in this 

preamble as being available in the 

docket, will become part of this docket 

and will be available for inspection or 

copying at the above address between 9 

a.m. and 2 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nicole Brophy, Project Manager, 

Waterways Management Branch, at 

(215) 271–4889. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Request for Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 


cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS